[ivanbakel]

How did you come to that conclusion? The point made is that Java 8 incurs costs compared to newer versions, so you need to "budget" for it. If you can't afford to not run it, then Java 8 would be saving you money/time somehow.

[wideareanetwork]

Because the first half of the article was praising Java 8 and it’s various benefits.

I didnt read the second half because I couldnt make sense of the negative headline with the positive text.

[fouric]

This is called "judging a book by its cover".

Merely making assessments of an article after only reading a fraction of it (or the title!) is bad enough, but spreading those misunderstandings to other people is even worse - not only are you harming their understanding, but you're also misrepresenting the author's points.

In addition, nowhere near "half" of the article is praising Java 8 - the very first paragraph says "This is one of the reasons why Java 8, almost 7 years after its first release, is still widely used.", which is barely "praise", and then the rest (>80%) recommends that you not use it.

[viraptor]

> the first half of the article was praising Java 8

It wasn't though... not sure why you got that impression? (I do think though that the text could use a few edits for easier reading - maybe it just isn't easy to understand when skimming)